2006-10-25 06:11:26 · 11 answers · asked by crinklechip 2 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
You know, I really don't know but Madonna and her family could have handled it differently and more privately.
However it does amaze me that now she has to rationalize the situation away. Rationalizing has become a way public figures use to make the matter a good thing or go away. Just look at the Foley issue ... rationalizing it and just go check oneself into a rehab facility (lol) can make it OK! Now that is a joke from the people making laws protecting children (Republicans). I think it's only to hide him from the media and public until election day.
Madonna adopting a baby or an older child is a good thing for the child well being. But if it's about her trying to what is called "buying a child" to make yourself (Madonna) look good to the public that is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! No matter what rationalization you give it.
Just remember the book and movie "Mommy Dearest" the Joan and Christina Crawford (her adopted daughter). Not saying this is Madonna issue or goal but who do you believe -- the media or Madonna?
Who really cares. It ONLY concerns all families involved!!!! The real father of the baby and the adopted family (Madonna and Guy Richie).
2006-10-25 09:16:03 · answer #1 · answered by BVAB 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe she is an attention seeker, maybe she want to be a mom to more children. Who knows. As to the charity that would be a good idea. However, how much money and supplies will be given to the families once the corrupt government takes their share? I'm sure the families would get enough to be considered upper poverty levels. That extra bag of rice a month and bar of soap will go really far to solve the problems in Africa. Adopting 1 child doesn't make any difference in a poor country, but it makes a HUGE difference in 1 childs life. Adoption is about the CHILD right? Not the parents, countries, etc, but the child. Tell that child that she is better off starving or getting a fatal disease (only fatal because of the lack of medical attention in the shelter/orphanage), when she turns 13 or so and she is on the streets fending for herself, she is better off not being adopted. Staying in her culture and country is the best thing for her. After all once you leave you can never learn your culture, language or return to Africa. I think the adoption was stopped due to all the bad press last time. I think she will have trouble adopting from anywhere due to all the bad publicity she gets.
2016-05-22 13:06:17 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont think it is wrong adopting as she has saved a little boy who will now have a good life but i do think its unfair that a celebrity can just do it cos they got the money, when there are hundreds of people who would love to adopt but have to be checked out and go through all the motions and then told they are not suitable.
2006-10-25 06:25:51 · answer #3 · answered by textkitten 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No its cool the more children are helped the better. As long as she dosent block the family from seeing him.....I know thats not normal but it would work better here than in normal adoption scenario, its obvious that the family are struggling to survive and had no option but to give him up, so they shouldnt be denied access? its not as if they would mess it up, and try and steal him, they are in Africa and Madonna has amazing security!
2006-10-25 07:22:26 · answer #4 · answered by Zinc 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, not sure if the adoption was wrong. But it certainly seems that it's the celeb "in thing" to do, like a fashion trend. My heart hopes they truly want/love this child. My head says "groan..... another celebrity trying to appear more generous than they really are, hoping it will keep them in the spotlight."
2006-10-25 06:18:52 · answer #5 · answered by <><><> 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
what is so wrong about it? she's helping because she can, just because she made it to fame and fortune, does it mean she must shutup and sit in a corner when the lights are turned off her, she's got a right to give love as long as she has it within her to give. Who of those buggers who condemn her has done anything remotely as noble as not only donating to charity, but making someone needy a part of your life forever and ever?
2006-10-25 06:25:31 · answer #6 · answered by Wisdom 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Long way to go to adopt a child - being cynical the poor little kid probably had to be a certain shade of brown for this overblown pair of American fa*rts.
2006-10-27 01:29:14 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How can it be wrong? She has effectively saved a childs life. The media coverage surrounding it is wrong though, and she could have gone about it a bit better.
2006-10-25 06:14:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
she has every right to do so god bless her and guy what a to see someone in the world gives a dam
2006-10-28 07:24:27 · answer #9 · answered by needanswers 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not me,good luck to the lad.
2006-10-25 06:21:28 · answer #10 · answered by Andyp P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋